Most amazing aspect of Gregg Williams affidavit -- he signed it on Friday, September 14, 2012
Actually it's not uncommon for witnesses to give affidavits in cases where they have previously provided testimony in other forms. Usually one side will do it in response to some motion being brought by the other side, typically close to a trial date. It's often done to clarify or reinforce a position or testimony already given and I'm sure that's what the NFL will claim is being done here.
The problem here is that, at least in litigation, the parties get to depose and cross examine witnesses to check and challenge the veracity of their testimony. Vilma and the others have been afforded no such chance and this has been trial by ambush. This would never fly in a real court, only in Goodell's kangaroo court.
I don't know what happened; I wasn't there and probably never will know. But that's the problem-Goodell wasn't there either. At best all he knows is what he's been told, which is 180 degrees the opposite of what others have said. It's a classic "he said, she said" and either side can argue that the other sides witnesses have vested reasons for saying what they've said.
At worst, Goodell's working his own agenda, a very real possibility. He's not just some judge sitting on an ivory tower; he's also a defendant in a very serious defamation suit. GW's affidavit serves Goodell just as conveniently as it does GW. It doesn't take much cynicism to see the mutual advantage to both GW and Goodell with this affidavit. Maybe Goodell was acting in good faith, maybe not. That's why the ability to cross examine is so central to any notion of true fairness and justice and why it's so important here.
But I don't think it will happen unless Berrigan steps in. As for me, I lost all respect for the NFL months ago. Ginsberg's a good lawyer so we'll see what happens. Right now, I just want to win a game. If Goodell gets sacked at some point in the process, well that'll work too.
This post was edited on 9/17 at 7:41 pm